Separating Family Tree

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Separating Family Tree

Gary Bussiere
Hi all,

I've been trying to separate a family tree database.

Basically, I would like all ancestors, including the siblings of those
ancestors or any other person attached to them (ie: spouses or
descendants of that person). Splitting a master family tree in two parts.

I can get ancestors of a person but the second part (ie: siblings, etc)
is a bit hard. Looked at some of the people filters but really didn't
see anything I could use unless I missed something.

Tagging everybody in the tree starting with the person and above would
work. Then export everything with that tag but that is tons of tagging.

Or I could also start deleting everybody below that person. Backups
would be made before any attempt. But again, tons of work.

Descendants of the person is easy and would create part of the family
tree split.

Anybody have ideas on how to tackle this?





_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Separating Family Tree

Ron Johnson
On 3/29/19 12:45 PM, Gary B wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I've been trying to separate a family tree database.
>
> Basically, I would like all ancestors, including the siblings of those
> ancestors or any other person attached to them (ie: spouses or descendants
> of that person). Splitting a master family tree in two parts.
>
> I can get ancestors of a person but the second part (ie: siblings, etc) is
> a bit hard. Looked at some of the people filters but really didn't see
> anything I could use unless I missed something.
>
> Tagging everybody in the tree starting with the person and above would
> work. Then export everything with that tag but that is tons of tagging.
>
> Or I could also start deleting everybody below that person. Backups would
> be made before any attempt. But again, tons of work.
>
> Descendants of the person is easy and would create part of the family tree
> split.
>
> Anybody have ideas on how to tackle this?

There used to be a "Connected To" filter, but I can't seem to find it anymore.

--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.


_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Separating Family Tree

Dave Scheipers
In reply to this post by Gary Bussiere
Hi Gary

There was a thread earlier this month on this issue. For maintenance
reasons, I caution you to keep the tree together. The only reason to
split that makes sense to me is to send a relative their portion of
the family..

https://sourceforge.net/p/gramps/mailman/gramps-users/thread/CAAbx1S7fXGtT4cySNaxUgveNRvtAhHJfk6ZctQJiwNarbhRCxg%40mail.gmail.com/#msg36614086

But when I need to  filter as I think you are querying....

I use a four filter combination when doing what you need, It selects
all of a base person's relatives. It will also include the known
immediate in-law family members, known previous marriages and any step
children. I keep them as a set so all I need to do is change the base
person's ID number then run Filter D to create the export or report.
If you do not care about any in-laws, the first two filters are the
important ones.

Filter A
Ancestral filters > Ancestors of <person>

Filter B
Descendant filters > Descendant family members of <FILTER A> match

Filter C
Filter filters > Spouses of <FILTER B> match

Filter D
General filters > People matching the filter <FILTER B>
General filters > People matching the filter <FILTER C>
Family filters > Children of <FILTER C> match
Family filters > Parents of <FILTER C> match
Family filters > Siblings of <FILTER C> match
Family filters > Spouses of <FILTER C> match
Option: At least one rule must apply

On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 1:46 PM Gary B <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hi all,
>
> I've been trying to separate a family tree database.
>
> Basically, I would like all ancestors, including the siblings of those
> ancestors or any other person attached to them (ie: spouses or
> descendants of that person). Splitting a master family tree in two parts.
>
> I can get ancestors of a person but the second part (ie: siblings, etc)
> is a bit hard. Looked at some of the people filters but really didn't
> see anything I could use unless I missed something.
>
> Tagging everybody in the tree starting with the person and above would
> work. Then export everything with that tag but that is tons of tagging.
>
> Or I could also start deleting everybody below that person. Backups
> would be made before any attempt. But again, tons of work.
>
> Descendants of the person is easy and would create part of the family
> tree split.
>
> Anybody have ideas on how to tackle this?
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> https://gramps-project.org


_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Separating Family Tree

GRAMPS - User mailing list
In reply to this post by Gary Bussiere
Nothing wrong with lots of Tags. You can recursively run filters to find as much of the blended & extended family as you like.

As you suggested, you can get a bare minimum Tree - Start with Filtering all Ancestors & Descendants of a specific person, then Tag those.

The subsequent filters are all based on the Tag.

Filter to the Siblings of the Tagged Persons to include blood Aunts/Uncle's & direct Sibs of the Target Ancestor and re-apply the Tag.

Find Spouses of Tagged Persons to add step-parents, Aunts/Uncles by marriage & sib-in-laws then re-apply the Tag.

Repeat the step above to find step-aunts/uncle's, and re-apply the Tag. Repeat this step until the reported count of Found Person's doesn't increase and you will have included all the ex-spouses who are peripherally inter-related.

Find the Children and Parents of the Tagged and that adds all the half-sibs, in-law step-parents, immediate cousins  & nieces/nephews then re-apply the Tag.

Run the Spouse of Tagged once more and you'll have the Married surnames for all those extended family.

Once you've exported the Tagged Tree, delete the Tag (since you can't select a group of People to remove the Tag)

-Brian

On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 12:47, Gary B
Hi all,

I've been trying to separate a family tree database.

Basically, I would like all ancestors, including the siblings of those
ancestors or any other person attached to them (ie: spouses or
descendants of that person). Splitting a master family tree in two parts.

I can get ancestors of a person but the second part (ie: siblings, etc)
is a bit hard. Looked at some of the people filters but really didn't
see anything I could use unless I missed something.

Tagging everybody in the tree starting with the person and above would
work. Then export everything with that tag but that is tons of tagging.

Or I could also start deleting everybody below that person. Backups
would be made before any attempt. But again, tons of work.

Descendants of the person is easy and would create part of the family
tree split.

Anybody have ideas on how to tackle this?


_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Separating Family Tree

Doug-11
In reply to this post by Gary Bussiere
Hi Gary,

I think the filter example 7 "All people related to me but
not my wife" in the gramps Wiki:
https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Example_filters#Example_7._All_people_related_to_me_but_not_my_wife
should do what you want.

It's a 2-part filter: (filter A) Ancestors of your chosen
personĀ  followed by (filter B) Descendant family members of
the filter A ; you can extend it to 3 parts if you want
"in-laws of in-laws" as well: (filter C) Descendant family
members of filter B; and so on..

Doug

On 29/03/2019 17:45, Gary B wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I've been trying to separate a family tree database.
>
> Basically, I would like all ancestors, including the
> siblings of those ancestors or any other person attached
> to them (ie: spouses or descendants of that person).
> Splitting a master family tree in two parts.
>
> I can get ancestors of a person but the second part (ie:
> siblings, etc) is a bit hard. Looked at some of the people
> filters but really didn't see anything I could use unless
> I missed something.
>
> Tagging everybody in the tree starting with the person and
> above would work. Then export everything with that tag but
> that is tons of tagging.
>
> Or I could also start deleting everybody below that
> person. Backups would be made before any attempt. But
> again, tons of work.
>
> Descendants of the person is easy and would create part of
> the family tree split.
>
> Anybody have ideas on how to tackle this?
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> https://gramps-project.org
>



_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Separating Family Tree

Gary Bussiere
In reply to this post by Dave Scheipers
Thanks. I saw the other tread but didn't really give me a answer. Close
though. I keep a master tree with everything included and I wouldn't
really split that up. However I don't want to send the whole tree or
report to someone, just part of it.

I used two filters.

Filter A: Ancestors of <person>

then ran

Filter B: Spouses of <Filter A> match
           Siblings of <Filter A> match
           Children of <Filter A> match

I didn't want the descendants of the person selected. I then exported
that and imported the tree into a new database. Had to do some cleanup
with unused objects but that seemed to do what I had in mind.

Gary


On 3/29/19 3:35 PM, Dave Scheipers wrote:

> Hi Gary
>
> There was a thread earlier this month on this issue. For maintenance
> reasons, I caution you to keep the tree together. The only reason to
> split that makes sense to me is to send a relative their portion of
> the family..
>
> https://sourceforge.net/p/gramps/mailman/gramps-users/thread/CAAbx1S7fXGtT4cySNaxUgveNRvtAhHJfk6ZctQJiwNarbhRCxg%40mail.gmail.com/#msg36614086
>
> But when I need to  filter as I think you are querying....
>
> I use a four filter combination when doing what you need, It selects
> all of a base person's relatives. It will also include the known
> immediate in-law family members, known previous marriages and any step
> children. I keep them as a set so all I need to do is change the base
> person's ID number then run Filter D to create the export or report.
> If you do not care about any in-laws, the first two filters are the
> important ones.
>
> Filter A
> Ancestral filters > Ancestors of <person>
>
> Filter B
> Descendant filters > Descendant family members of <FILTER A> match
>
> Filter C
> Filter filters > Spouses of <FILTER B> match
>
> Filter D
> General filters > People matching the filter <FILTER B>
> General filters > People matching the filter <FILTER C>
> Family filters > Children of <FILTER C> match
> Family filters > Parents of <FILTER C> match
> Family filters > Siblings of <FILTER C> match
> Family filters > Spouses of <FILTER C> match
> Option: At least one rule must apply
>
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 1:46 PM Gary B <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've been trying to separate a family tree database.
>>
>> Basically, I would like all ancestors, including the siblings of those
>> ancestors or any other person attached to them (ie: spouses or
>> descendants of that person). Splitting a master family tree in two parts.
>>
>> I can get ancestors of a person but the second part (ie: siblings, etc)
>> is a bit hard. Looked at some of the people filters but really didn't
>> see anything I could use unless I missed something.
>>
>> Tagging everybody in the tree starting with the person and above would
>> work. Then export everything with that tag but that is tons of tagging.
>>
>> Or I could also start deleting everybody below that person. Backups
>> would be made before any attempt. But again, tons of work.
>>
>> Descendants of the person is easy and would create part of the family
>> tree split.
>>
>> Anybody have ideas on how to tackle this?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gramps-users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
>> https://gramps-project.org


_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Separating Family Tree

Dave Scheipers
Congrats,

In the Export Options, where you select the Person Filter there is
also a Reference Filter. "Include all selected records." This is the
default option. The other option limits places, sources, citation, etc
that only apply to the people in the filter. "Do not include records
not linked to a selected person" Any time you export a partial segment
of the whole database, you probably want to limit the references that
only link back to the people filter.

HTH Dave


On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 7:57 PM Gary B <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Thanks. I saw the other tread but didn't really give me a answer. Close
> though. I keep a master tree with everything included and I wouldn't
> really split that up. However I don't want to send the whole tree or
> report to someone, just part of it.
>
> I used two filters.
>
> Filter A: Ancestors of <person>
>
> then ran
>
> Filter B: Spouses of <Filter A> match
>            Siblings of <Filter A> match
>            Children of <Filter A> match
>
> I didn't want the descendants of the person selected. I then exported
> that and imported the tree into a new database. Had to do some cleanup
> with unused objects but that seemed to do what I had in mind.
>
> Gary
>
>
> On 3/29/19 3:35 PM, Dave Scheipers wrote:
> > Hi Gary
> >
> > There was a thread earlier this month on this issue. For maintenance
> > reasons, I caution you to keep the tree together. The only reason to
> > split that makes sense to me is to send a relative their portion of
> > the family..
> >
> > https://sourceforge.net/p/gramps/mailman/gramps-users/thread/CAAbx1S7fXGtT4cySNaxUgveNRvtAhHJfk6ZctQJiwNarbhRCxg%40mail.gmail.com/#msg36614086
> >
> > But when I need to  filter as I think you are querying....
> >
> > I use a four filter combination when doing what you need, It selects
> > all of a base person's relatives. It will also include the known
> > immediate in-law family members, known previous marriages and any step
> > children. I keep them as a set so all I need to do is change the base
> > person's ID number then run Filter D to create the export or report.
> > If you do not care about any in-laws, the first two filters are the
> > important ones.
> >
> > Filter A
> > Ancestral filters > Ancestors of <person>
> >
> > Filter B
> > Descendant filters > Descendant family members of <FILTER A> match
> >
> > Filter C
> > Filter filters > Spouses of <FILTER B> match
> >
> > Filter D
> > General filters > People matching the filter <FILTER B>
> > General filters > People matching the filter <FILTER C>
> > Family filters > Children of <FILTER C> match
> > Family filters > Parents of <FILTER C> match
> > Family filters > Siblings of <FILTER C> match
> > Family filters > Spouses of <FILTER C> match
> > Option: At least one rule must apply
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 1:46 PM Gary B <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I've been trying to separate a family tree database.
> >>
> >> Basically, I would like all ancestors, including the siblings of those
> >> ancestors or any other person attached to them (ie: spouses or
> >> descendants of that person). Splitting a master family tree in two parts.
> >>
> >> I can get ancestors of a person but the second part (ie: siblings, etc)
> >> is a bit hard. Looked at some of the people filters but really didn't
> >> see anything I could use unless I missed something.
> >>
> >> Tagging everybody in the tree starting with the person and above would
> >> work. Then export everything with that tag but that is tons of tagging.
> >>
> >> Or I could also start deleting everybody below that person. Backups
> >> would be made before any attempt. But again, tons of work.
> >>
> >> Descendants of the person is easy and would create part of the family
> >> tree split.
> >>
> >> Anybody have ideas on how to tackle this?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Gramps-users mailing list
> >> [hidden email]
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> >> https://gramps-project.org


_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Separating Family Tree

Gary Bussiere
In reply to this post by Doug-11
Thanks for the gramps wiki. Must have missed that.

Although example 7 isn't really what I want to do. It did point me in
the right direction. And it will be a good reference in the future.

Gary


On 3/29/19 7:05 PM, Doug wrote:

> Hi Gary,
>
> I think the filter example 7 "All people related to me but not my wife"
> in the gramps Wiki:
> https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Example_filters#Example_7._All_people_related_to_me_but_not_my_wife 
>
> should do what you want.
>
> It's a 2-part filter: (filter A) Ancestors of your chosen person  
> followed by (filter B) Descendant family members of the filter A ; you
> can extend it to 3 parts if you want "in-laws of in-laws" as well:
> (filter C) Descendant family members of filter B; and so on..
>
> Doug
>
> On 29/03/2019 17:45, Gary B wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've been trying to separate a family tree database.
>>
>> Basically, I would like all ancestors, including the siblings of those
>> ancestors or any other person attached to them (ie: spouses or
>> descendants of that person). Splitting a master family tree in two parts.
>>
>> I can get ancestors of a person but the second part (ie: siblings,
>> etc) is a bit hard. Looked at some of the people filters but really
>> didn't see anything I could use unless I missed something.
>>
>> Tagging everybody in the tree starting with the person and above would
>> work. Then export everything with that tag but that is tons of tagging.
>>
>> Or I could also start deleting everybody below that person. Backups
>> would be made before any attempt. But again, tons of work.
>>
>> Descendants of the person is easy and would create part of the family
>> tree split.
>>
>> Anybody have ideas on how to tackle this?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gramps-users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
>> https://gramps-project.org
>>
>


_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Separating Family Tree

Gary Bussiere
In reply to this post by Dave Scheipers
One thing I did was to go read the wiki again on exports and redid the
export with the filters.

The wiki didn't really explain the 'Do not include records not linked to
the selected person' option for the Referance Filter. The ' Include all
selected records' option still makes more sense to me though.

The reason being is when the 'Calculated Previews' button is selected,
it showed 119 people and not the whole database which is 625 people.

I wanted all the records (ie: sources, citations, notes, ect) attached
to those 119 people 'selected' but not the rest.

I think I now understand how the filters work with the whole database
and exporting just part of it. So even though I filtered 119 people out
of the database, the other people and data (records) attached to them
are just kinda hidden from view.

Thats why I didn't grasp the concept of a second or third filter to
include people connected to the ancestors selected during the first filter.

How can you select something that's not showing? Answer: Because the
data is still there but hidden because of the first filter used...makes
sense to me now.

Is this a right way to think about this and using filters?

A bit confusing with exporting because the 'Person Filter' only exports
the 119 people selected and none other. Not sure how that could be
reworded though. Maybe people instaid of person.

'Include all records in database' and then 'Include only records for
selected people'. Or something like that. Double 'nots' are confusing.
Turns into a positive and not a negative...at least in english if I
remember my grammer.

'Include records linked to the selected person'. Should really be people
and not person (unless there is only one person selected and exported).

However, I would still import the database in a new tree anyway to check
it. Using the 'Remove the Unused Objects' tool will clean the tree. So
not a really big deal. Just a bit more work. Hope this is clear enough.
Anybody have thoughts about this?


On 3/29/19 8:30 PM, Dave Scheipers wrote:

> Congrats,
>
> In the Export Options, where you select the Person Filter there is
> also a Reference Filter. "Include all selected records." This is the
> default option. The other option limits places, sources, citation, etc
> that only apply to the people in the filter. "Do not include records
> not linked to a selected person" Any time you export a partial segment
> of the whole database, you probably want to limit the references that
> only link back to the people filter.
>
> HTH Dave


_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Separating Family Tree

Dave Scheipers
Hi Gary

In affect, you are creating just one filter. You just need to create
some "sub-filters" to ultimately get just the records you want. You
cannot select for descendants of ancestors before selecting those
ancestors. Sometimes those filters can span across other parts of the
database; events, places etc.

When you do the export, in the Export Options, you set the Person
Filter. If you leave the Reference Filter to "Include All", you will
get all places, sources, citations, media, etc found in the database.
Changing it to "Do not include records not linked to a selected
person" the export will limit all the extra references to just those
components that those 119 people use. This is what you indicate you
want.

Try it both ways importing the results into new separate databases to
see the differences.

HTH Dave

On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 11:25 AM Gary B <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> One thing I did was to go read the wiki again on exports and redid the
> export with the filters.
>
> The wiki didn't really explain the 'Do not include records not linked to
> the selected person' option for the Referance Filter. The ' Include all
> selected records' option still makes more sense to me though.
>
> The reason being is when the 'Calculated Previews' button is selected,
> it showed 119 people and not the whole database which is 625 people.
>
> I wanted all the records (ie: sources, citations, notes, ect) attached
> to those 119 people 'selected' but not the rest.
>
> I think I now understand how the filters work with the whole database
> and exporting just part of it. So even though I filtered 119 people out
> of the database, the other people and data (records) attached to them
> are just kinda hidden from view.
>
> Thats why I didn't grasp the concept of a second or third filter to
> include people connected to the ancestors selected during the first filter.
>
> How can you select something that's not showing? Answer: Because the
> data is still there but hidden because of the first filter used...makes
> sense to me now.
>
> Is this a right way to think about this and using filters?
>
> A bit confusing with exporting because the 'Person Filter' only exports
> the 119 people selected and none other. Not sure how that could be
> reworded though. Maybe people instaid of person.
>
> 'Include all records in database' and then 'Include only records for
> selected people'. Or something like that. Double 'nots' are confusing.
> Turns into a positive and not a negative...at least in english if I
> remember my grammer.
>
> 'Include records linked to the selected person'. Should really be people
> and not person (unless there is only one person selected and exported).
>
> However, I would still import the database in a new tree anyway to check
> it. Using the 'Remove the Unused Objects' tool will clean the tree. So
> not a really big deal. Just a bit more work. Hope this is clear enough.
> Anybody have thoughts about this?
>
>
> On 3/29/19 8:30 PM, Dave Scheipers wrote:
> > Congrats,
> >
> > In the Export Options, where you select the Person Filter there is
> > also a Reference Filter. "Include all selected records." This is the
> > default option. The other option limits places, sources, citation, etc
> > that only apply to the people in the filter. "Do not include records
> > not linked to a selected person" Any time you export a partial segment
> > of the whole database, you probably want to limit the references that
> > only link back to the people filter.
> >
> > HTH Dave


_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Separating Family Tree

Gary Bussiere
ah...I see now. Been experimenting with different filters and ways to
export. Before I was trying to use one filter with many rules. Needless
to say, that didn't work out.

Creating the extra sub filters worked and pulled the individuals that I
wanted to include. Just didn't really understand the how and why it
worked the way it did.

So in the filter list for name:

Ancestors of ? : Filter A
Ancestors of ? : Filter B

and included a few hints in the comments section what they do. (ie:
Include Parents, Siblings and Children)

That will keep them together somewhat in the list of filters.

Wish I could group them all together in some way but I didn't find a way
to do that. The ? will remind me to check and/or select the individual
before I run it again. Thanks again for the tips and help.

Gary


On 3/31/19 12:01 PM, Dave Scheipers wrote:

> Hi Gary
>
> In affect, you are creating just one filter. You just need to create
> some "sub-filters" to ultimately get just the records you want. You
> cannot select for descendants of ancestors before selecting those
> ancestors. Sometimes those filters can span across other parts of the
> database; events, places etc.
>
> When you do the export, in the Export Options, you set the Person
> Filter. If you leave the Reference Filter to "Include All", you will
> get all places, sources, citations, media, etc found in the database.
> Changing it to "Do not include records not linked to a selected
> person" the export will limit all the extra references to just those
> components that those 119 people use. This is what you indicate you
> want.
>
> Try it both ways importing the results into new separate databases to
> see the differences.
>
> HTH Dave
>
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 11:25 AM Gary B <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> One thing I did was to go read the wiki again on exports and redid the
>> export with the filters.
>>
>> The wiki didn't really explain the 'Do not include records not linked to
>> the selected person' option for the Referance Filter. The ' Include all
>> selected records' option still makes more sense to me though.
>>


_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Separating Family Tree

Doug-11
Hi Gary,

A critical piece of advice in the Examples Filters Wiki is
in the first paragraph:
"When creating custom filters, always make sure you have the
Filter sidebar visible so you can test them before use:
either click on the Filter tab on the right, or click on
'Add a Gramplet' and select 'Filter'. To test, select the
custom filter you made; then click Find".

That way you see the effect of your filter combination up to
that stage and can see better how to correct it or extend it,

HTH

Doug




On 01/04/2019 00:57, Gary B wrote:

> ah...I see now. Been experimenting with different filters
> and ways to export. Before I was trying to use one filter
> with many rules. Needless to say, that didn't work out.
>
> Creating the extra sub filters worked and pulled the
> individuals that I wanted to include. Just didn't really
> understand the how and why it worked the way it did.
>
> So in the filter list for name:
>
> Ancestors of ? : Filter A
> Ancestors of ? : Filter B
>
> and included a few hints in the comments section what they
> do. (ie: Include Parents, Siblings and Children)
>
> That will keep them together somewhat in the list of filters.
>
> Wish I could group them all together in some way but I
> didn't find a way to do that. The ? will remind me to
> check and/or select the individual before I run it again.
> Thanks again for the tips and help.
>
> Gary
>
>
> On 3/31/19 12:01 PM, Dave Scheipers wrote:
>> Hi Gary
>>
>> In affect, you are creating just one filter. You just
>> need to create
>> some "sub-filters" to ultimately get just the records you
>> want. You
>> cannot select for descendants of ancestors before
>> selecting those
>> ancestors. Sometimes those filters can span across other
>> parts of the
>> database; events, places etc.
>>
>> When you do the export, in the Export Options, you set
>> the Person
>> Filter. If you leave the Reference Filter to "Include
>> All", you will
>> get all places, sources, citations, media, etc found in
>> the database.
>> Changing it to "Do not include records not linked to a
>> selected
>> person" the export will limit all the extra references to
>> just those
>> components that those 119 people use. This is what you
>> indicate you
>> want.
>>
>> Try it both ways importing the results into new separate
>> databases to
>> see the differences.
>>
>> HTH Dave
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 11:25 AM Gary B
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> One thing I did was to go read the wiki again on exports
>>> and redid the
>>> export with the filters.
>>>
>>> The wiki didn't really explain the 'Do not include
>>> records not linked to
>>> the selected person' option for the Referance Filter.
>>> The ' Include all
>>> selected records' option still makes more sense to me
>>> though.
>>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> https://gramps-project.org
>



_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org